MOVIE REVIEW: EXTRACTION 2

 

Back from the brink of death, commando Tyler Rake embarks on a dangerous mission to save a ruthless gangster's imprisoned family.

Director: Sam Hargrave

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Golshifteh Farahani, Adam Bessa, Olga Kurylenko, Daniel Bernhardt, Tinatin Dalakishvili, Idris Elba

Release Date: June 16, 2023

Genre: Action, Thriller

Rated R for strong/bloody violence throughout and language

Runtime: 2h 2m

Sam Hargrave's follow up to his pandemic hit doesn't offer a lot more in terms of story as it plays fairly close to the original's plot simply switching out targets and adversaries.  The film's main draw is its action sequences and they are taken to another level of coordinated madness that nearly makes you forgot about the incredibly barebones story driving the entire thing.  Hargrave spends very little time explaining how Hemsworth's Rake survived a seemingly fatal wound at the end of the original.  Once that's out of way, a rather intriguing appearance from Idris Elba starts the story in earnest.  The set up is fairly basic as we're introduced to an array of Eastern European bad guys straight from central casting.  They're disposable fodder that serves as nothing more than meat for the grinder.  It quickly leads to the 22 unbroken shot that's impressive in terms of the sheer scale due to all the moving parts involved in coordinating the carnage thrown onscreen.  Its audaciously outlandish and insane but it's hard not to enjoy the action spectacle thrown at the audience in steady succession.  The rest of the film still has plenty of set pieces following the prison escape but that moment is definitely the most memorable of the entire film.  Sadly, the story doesn't get nearly the same amount of attention that the action does since it does the bare minimum to make the character more three dimensional.  The cast, for their part, do their best to make the characters more interesting and engaging than what's written on the page.  Chris Hemsworth's leads the film with the same steely dogged determination that he brought in the original.  The film doesn't ask him to do much more than be a believable killing machine as he dispatches enemy with a impressive gusto, people of a certain age might get flashbacks of 1985's Commando which less quips.  Golshifteh Farahani and Adam Bessa are given far more to do in this entry with Farahani taking full advantage of the expanded screen time.  Hemsworth and Farahani share some great chemistry together, the third film would be wise to take as much time with the characters as it does with the action sequences.  

B-

MOVIE REVIEW: THOR: LOVE AND THUNDER

 

Director: Taika Waititi

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Christian Bale, Tessa Thompson, Jaimie Alexander, Taika Waititi, Russell Crowe, Natalie Portman

Release Date: July 8, 2022

Genre: Action, Adventure, Comedy, Fantasy, Music, Romance, Sci-Fi

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, language, some suggestive material and partial nudity.

Runtime:1h 59m

Review:

Taika Waititi's Thor: Love and Thunder, his follow up to Thor: Ragnarok, is a chaotic unfocused kaleidoscope that struggles to find the consistent fun and charm that made the previous film so enjoyable.  Waititi's delivers some truly impressive set pieces the majority of which are colorfully opulent but one monochromatic fight sequence is likely to leave the biggest impact.  You get the sense that he's poured his mind onto the screen like a visual trek through his stream of conscience.  It works in spots, but it never finds its footing consistently due to sizable tonal shifts throughout the film which makes for some noticeable dead spots.  The script, written by Waitit, tries to include some heftier emotional depth to the whole thing but it never connects the way it should.  Additionally, the humor here never feels as organic as it did in the previous entry making for more chuckles than laugh out loud moments.  The film relies heavily on Chris Hemsworth's charm, and he carries the film with relative ease that shouldn't come as a surprise since the character is like a second skin by now.  He's clearly having a great time and that energy is the driving force for the film. Natalie Portman returns to the fold but there is a strange lack of chemistry between her and Hemsworth.  Her bulked up frame makes for a great visual when she's in her Thor attire but her performance is noticeably stiff reminiscent of her turns in the Star Wars prequels.  Their relationship is the central part of the story but there is a disconnect which hurts the film overall.  Tessa Thompson returns but isn't given all that much to do outside of a few quips and action sequences.  Likewise, Christian Bale's villain is underutilized for the better part of the film which is a shame because the character's story is intriguing.  There are moments where you get the sense that Bale is trying to give his character more depth but the film never gives him enough time to fully realized it.  It's an issue with the film overall, there are plenty of solid ideas but very few of them are allowed to blossom organically due to its frantic and scattershot approach.  As such, Thor: Love and Thunder is all candy colored empty calories with very little actual substance.

B-

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Extraction & The True History of the Kelly Gang

My dear reader(s), I hope you are keeping well — physically and mentally — in these strange, strange times.

Following a prolonged and entirely unintentional hiatus, yesterday I attempted an at-home double-bill, just I like I used to do at the cinema except the popcorn's not as good and nobody's kicking the back of my seat.

On yesterday's agenda, the Netflix original Extraction and the True History of the Kelly Gang.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

First up: Extraction.

When a drug lord's son is kidnapped by a rival kingpin, a troubled mercenary is his only hope of survival.

Extraction is a serviceable thriller that's heavy on fighting, chasing, and bleeding, and light on surprises. The movie trades on the fact that most of us probably *would* trust Chris Hemsworth with our lives, making it less insufferable than it could have been, despite its not quite earning its runtime. If Hemsworth is a guy that brings you to the movies, you won't be disappointed; this is definitely his movie. Inhabiting broadly-drawn characters, supporting players are neither good nor bad enough to make a lasting impression. (But if there's an award for obviousness, please hand it to David Harbour now.) By-the-numbers fight scenes are likewise fine but unremarkable, peppering a seemingly endless race to the finish. There's been a bit of buzz about the single(ish)-shot chase scene, but all its technical prowess couldn't keep me from longing for its eventual end, while predictable twists and redundant action diminish the plot's high stakes. Outside an eyeful of Hemsworth, Extraction's high points for me were unintentional (probably?) nods to Gladiator and Crocodile Dundee II, but, you know, desperate times and all.

Extraction clocks in at 116 minutes and is rated R for "strong bloody violence throughout, language, and brief drug use."

Like Triple Frontier before it, Extraction proves that Netflix can play the action game with the big boys. Like Triple Frontier before it, Extraction also makes one wonder if that's a game worth playing anymore.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Extraction gets five and a half.

Next on the docket, the True History of the Kelly Gang.

The maybe-sorta-kinda-trueish story of Australian outlaw Ned Kelly.

It's imperative that I preface what follows with a disclaimer: No matter what I want or expect of a movie, and no matter how far from that it may land, I always try to keep an open mind and give it a fair shake. That being said...

Y'all know I watched this movie for Charlie Hunnam, right? If you're thinking of paying for this film expressly to see Charlie, here's the scoop: Charlie's not in it a lot, but there's a lot of Charlie in it. His character is relevant only to the first 30-or-so minutes, and after that it's a whopping 90 minutes of Charlie-less movie. Forewarned is forearmed.

1917's George MacKay headlines this biopic, following the infamous Ned Kelly from his horrifying childhood through his brief, criminal, adult life. MacKay was nothing short of brilliant in 1917, and he's equally so here, though the material is less impressive. Russell Crowe is great, as usual, in a small but pivotal role. The True History of the Kelly Gang plods along at a snail's pace, making it seem very long indeed. Punk musical stylings and trippy, strobe-lit frames underscore Kelly's unhinged descent into violent, unlawful behavior. The movie sometimes seems to shock just for shock's sake, with vile language, grotesque violence, and uncomfortable situations. I don't flinch from any of the above when necessary and deftly handled, but here they're only sometimes the former and never the latter. Ultimately, the movie serves as a nice showcase for MacKay's talent, but has little else to recommend it.

The True History of the Kelly Gang runs 124 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence throughout, bloody images, pervasive language, sexual content, and some nudity."

The True History of the Kelly Gang features strong performances, but it struggles with the complexity of an anti-hero that history both loves and hates. Of a possible nine Weasleys, the True History of the Kelly Gang gets five.

Until next time, dear reader(s), please keep yourselves safe and well, and I'll hope to see you at the cinema soon!

MOVIE REVIEW: EXTRACTION

A black-market mercenary who has nothing to lose is hired to rescue the kidnapped son of an imprisoned international crime lord. But in the murky underworld of weapons dealers and drug traffickers, an already deadly mission approaches the impossible.

Director: Sam Hargrave

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Rudhraksh Jaiswal, Pankaj Tripathi, Randeep Hooda, Golshifteh Farahani, Suraj Rikame,  David Harbour

Release Date: April 24, 2020

Genres: Action

Rated R for strong bloody violence throughout, language and brief drug use.

Runtime: 1 h 56 min 

Review:

Extraction bare bone action plot could have resulted in a big dud had it not been for the impressive direction from Sam Hargrave and a subdued but effective performance from Chris Hemsworth.  Sam Hargrave's seems fully aware that the story is a retread so he doesn't try to make it anything more than it is.  As such, he focuses on building impressive action set pieces that deliver a visceral punch.  These sequences pepper the film and they are the beating heart of the whole film.  The action is fast bloody and thoroughly enjoyable.  Is it a smart film, no far from it but it never pretends to be either.  At its heart the film is a body count shoot up in the vein of 80's classics like Commando or Rambo. Chris Hemsworth is ready made for this kind role and he delivers a strong but understated performance that's strong enough to keep his character interesting even if he's just fairly one dimensional.  The supporting characters are sparse with Rudhraksh Jaiswal getting the most screen time but his character doesn't have much depth.  David Harbour pops in for a quick second but he's gone before you know it adding very little to the film overall.  That's not to say anything about his performance because he's hardly phoning it but the film is just as bare bones as they come.  Hargrave's wants to deliver a sleek actioneer and he does so with impressive aplomb.  

B

MOVIE REVIEW: MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL

The Men in Black have expanded to cover the globe but so have the villains of the universe. To keep everyone safe, decorated Agent H and determined rookie M join forces -- an unlikely pairing that just might work. When aliens that can take the form of any human arrive on Earth, H and M embark on a globe-trotting adventure to save the agency -- and ultimately the world -- from their mischievous plans.

Director: F. Gary Gray

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tessa Thompson, Kumail Nanjiani, Rebecca Ferguson, Rafe Spall, Laurent and Larry Bourgeois, Liam Neeson, along with Emma Thompson

Release Date: June 14, 2019

Genres: Action, Adventure, Comedy

Rated PG-13 for sci-fi action, some language and suggestive material.

Runtime: 1h 54min

Review:

Men in Black: International is a half hearted reboot that does boast a pair of a game stars that almost makes the film memorable.  F. Gary Gray captures some of the feel from the original but its never maintained for a consistent amount of time.  As such, the film is better in parts than it is as a whole.  The scripting doesn’t help much with it playing to the most basic and predictable story beats.  So ultimately it’s up Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson to make the whole thing watchable, luckily their chemistry makes the whole thing an enjoyable romp even if it’s ultimately forgettable.  The Men In Black series has always had trouble nailing the original’s feel in the sequels.  The third entry in the film came close and is an underrated entry in the series, International will probably fall just short of that entry.  It did take on the gargantuan task of replacing the Will Smith/Tommy Lee Jones dynamic and it does reasonably well even if the story is generic and ultimately mundane.

B-

MOVIE REVIEW: AVENGERS: ENDGAME

Adrift in space with no food or water, Tony Stark sends a message to Pepper Potts as his oxygen supply starts to dwindle. Meanwhile, the remaining Avengers -- Thor, Black Widow, Captain America and Bruce Banner -- must figure out a way to bring back their vanquished allies for an epic showdown with Thanos -- the evil demigod who decimated the planet and the universe.

Director: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Don Cheadle, Paul Rudd, Brie Larson, Karen Gillan, Danai Gurira, Bradley Cooper, Josh Brolin

Release Date: April 24, 2019

Genres: Action, Adventure, Fantasy

Rated PG-13 for sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and some language

Runtime: 3 h 2min

Review:

Avengers Endgame is the final chapters of the first season of Marvel long running superhero show.  It’s been a bit of an issue that I’ve had with Marvel mainly because very few of the movies have ever just wowed me, that’s not to say I haven’t enjoyed them but they’ve never been the type of films that have blown my mind.  The episodic nature of them always reminded me more of a TV show than movies.  The Russo Brothers do have a nailed down their ability to manage all the various character and plotlines and this culmination does feel like a bit of a victory lap through the last 10 years of films. There are plenty of moments where fan service seems more important than actual plot but it works because the film is ultimately entertaining.  The first hour plays out like a Marvel version of the under watched HBO series The Leftovers with the 2^nd hour pushing into something very reminiscent of the classic series finale of Star Trek The Next Generation.  Much like that series finale the story focuses on the characters we’ve come to know over years as opposed massive action.  Sure it all leads to a climatic showdown but it’s smart to keep the focus on the main 6 characters since they’ve always been the focus of the entire endeavor.  Once the big show down comes it’s a massive spectacle that delivers some incredibly satisfying moments.  The only small drawback is that some of it feels fairly familiar with one moment seemingly channeling an iconic shot from Game of Thrones legendary Battle of the Bastards episode.  I’ll throw in the fact that if anyone whose familiar with another long seeded collection of superhero stories from DC animated universe will get a sense of déjà vu since that series ended with a very similar final battle.  Once the battle is over there are a few more lingering issues because there are plot holes aplenty if you think about many of the choices made, a few are particularly glaring,  It’s really a testament to the work of the cast and directors that film works because in lesser hands it could have been a real mess.  The film is a fitting end to this chapter even if the finality of it doesn’t quiet resonate much like that cliffhanger at the end of Infinity War. 

B-

Cindy Prascik's Review of Avengers Endgame

Yesterday I, along with three-quarters of the world's population, hit the cinema for Avengers: Endgame.

An important note on spoilers: The vast majority of movie-goers, and plenty of people who don't usually bother with the cinema, too, will see this movie. A smaller number wouldn't see it if it were the best film ever made; it's just not their thing. A movie like this is probably the only time that literally NOBODY needs someone else's input to decide whether or not to watch. Couple that with the fact that people are so twitchy about spoilers that I barely understand what constitutes one in some people's eyes, well, best not to risk it, I suppose. So...rather than a review, we'll call this a conversation. I'm starting with my thoughts, and--after you've seen the movie--I hope you'll revisit this and join me in the comments. In other words: HERE THERE BE SPOILERS. Also, this is gonna get long, as is only fitting for a three-plus-hour movie. Forewarned is forearmed on both counts.

Endgame marks the culmination of the Avengers Infinity Saga, and is the next-to-last film in Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It's all about the endings as the remaining Avengers attempt to undo the damage done by a snap of Thanos' fingers in Infinity War.

As I've noted time and again, I am not really a Marvel Person. I enjoy most of Marvel's films, but I don't find them to be anything special and I always have plenty of complaints, both legit and nitpicky. I'd read some spoilers for Endgame that left me thinking I wouldn't like it even as much as I do the average Marvel flick, but I am happy to say I was pleasantly surprised. Not only did I well and truly enjoy the picture, but many of the recurring beefs I have with Marvel product proved to be non-factors.

Endgame kicks off with Traffic's Dear Mr. Fantasy in glorious surround-sound. That right there is good for a whole lot of Weasleys, before I put even half an eyeball on the other two hours and 59 minutes. Epic.

The first hour of Endgame is not just good, it's excellent. The people who embody these heroes are decorated actors and adept at emotional as well as physical heavy lifting. Watching the survivors cope with the aftermath of Infinity War, interacting among themselves and with others, is a real treat. Robert Downey, Jr. is especially effective and, for the first time since maybe Tropic Thunder, it doesn't seem like he's playing an exaggerated version of himself. Sure, Tony Stark is still Tony Stark, but this performance is--dare I say it?--even a little understated, setting a perfect tone. Helping matters is the fact that the usual shoehorned one-liners are in short supply here. There is some unfortunate comedy (more on that later), but this go-round it's not Iron Man's fault.

Come the middle hour, Endgame starts to bog down a bit. I wasn't clock-watching (except for purposes of wanting to know when this or that happens), but it definitely didn't hold my attention like hour one. The third act has the big action, and--while it isn't as pointlessly bloated as Captain America: Civil War or Avengers: Infinity War--it probably could have used a trim. Having said all that, at no point in this three hours did it feel like I'd been sitting for 12 (a welcome change for me with Marvel) and, truly, through the end, the only times I looked at the clock were those times I wanted to mark at what point a certain scene happened or a character turned up. Performances: RDJ isn't the only one doing great work in Avengers: Endgame. Bradley Cooper continues to mesmerize as Rocket; he is extraordinary. Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner are magical when they share the screen, reminding me very much of Eva Green and Rory Kinnear's all-too-infrequent scenes together in Penny Dreadful. Paul Rudd...seriously, who doesn't love Paul Rudd? While most of the film is comparatively somber, Scott Lang gives us those lighter moments that--when done well and timely placed--provide important relief in such a grim tale. Tom Holland shows, again, that he's become the heart of the MCU, and Sebastian Stan--reminiscent of "...but I knew him..." in Captain America: the Winter Soldier--proves he needs only his two eyes and 15 seconds on camera to outshine a veritable gaggle of award-winning actors. The movie does a fair job of shaking out screen time among the principals, but the previously-dusted characters turn up late and don't get much to do. The bulk of the attention is (rightly) on the original Avengers, whose time with Marvel allegedly ends with this film. *cough cough* It remains Marvel's greatest strength that they've been able to find just the right people to inhabit their much-loved characters, which, for me, is what makes even their worst movies pretty enjoyable.

A couple quibbles, and let none of these be mistaken for reasons not to see this on a big screen: Wow is the God of Thunder ill-used here. Sure, the Thor movies are probably the lightest of Marvel's offerings (and also my favorites, for the record), but here he's straight-up comic relief, and it seems very unfair, especially as the character is visibly dealing with PTSD. Iron Man gets a scene straight out of a Best Picture nominee, but Thor's just a boozed-up fat joke? I call shenanigans! Thor's handling in Endgame is almost totally missed opportunities and dubious humor, very unfortunate for such a great character and an actor who deserves better. I also feel like Endgame craps on Steve Rogers a bit. Steve's friendship with Bucky is the cornerstone of his story, so it seems implausible that he would abandon Bucky to his (horrible) fate to stay in the past with Peggy. Steve being Steve, it's also unlikely he'd have upended Peggy's life in such a way, when she'd gotten married, had a family, and (as far as we know) been happy. Considering Peggy passed--what, three movies ago?--of natural causes, it felt very forced that half of Steve's close-ups in Endgame were of him mooning over that photo of her in the locket. I knew all that was coming and I honestly thought it would make me hate the movie, but...well...on down the line here I'll explain why it didn't.

As I said 18 years ago at the beginning of this dissertation, Avengers: Endgame is a climax, a torch-passing, an ending. As such, there are significant deaths and impending disappearances of long-loved characters. Tony Stark's passing hit me harder than expected, given how uninvested I've been in the character, but losing Nat? Well...that one about murdered me. Romanoff is a great character and ScarJo an even better actor; the movie feels her absence immediately and consistently once she's gone, despite the fact there are some super-badass female warriors carrying the girl-power mantle going forward. (Can Shuri have her own movie now, please and thank you?) Given the weight and volume the deaths, you'd think I might have shed a tear or two, but...nope. I, who ran right over two cinema employees on my way out of Saving Mr. Banks because I didn't see them through the veil of my tears...I, who had to be consoled by a stranger over the end credits of American Sniper...I couldn't muster so much as a sniffle here, and therein lies a big problem not only for Marvel, but for fantasy entertainment in general: "Death" has no real consequence, especially once the universe starts fiddling with time travel. If RDJ's next couple movies are flops? No worries, we'll just go back in time and un-kill him for Iron Man 12. Yes, I know they've stressed "dead means dead." I know this installment very specifically brings back only the characters who were dusted by Thanos, and not those who were killed otherwise. And I know everybody and their brother's Marvel contract is up. BUT...yeah, I'm still not buying it. If the demand is there and the principals are willing, any or all of them could pop back up at any time, and some of them seem quite likely to. (Lookin' at you, Loki!) The silver lining--and what allows me to not hate what they did with Steve Rogers--is I don't believe that was really Steve Rogers, or at least not the only Steve Rogers. Somewhere, there's a Steve Rogers who meant "'til the end of the line" when he said it. The way the scene played out, Bucky standing back, seemingly knowing what was happening and allowing Steve to choose his own happiness for once, also made it less horrible than it could have been, though, far as I'm concerned, still not the sendoff Steve Rogers deserved. (And may I mention again the quiet, heartbreaking genius of Sebastian Stan, which makes the scene?)

Moments: I'm nobody's feminist--or at least I stand so accused because I don't like Captain Marvel--but there's a bit where all the female heroes charge together against Thanos and...oh my...the chills! I loved the Cap vs. Cap fight, and the "America's ass" joke was genuinely funny and not over-used. It was great that Hot Tub Time Machine (probably not Sebastian Stan's proudest cinematic moment?) was name-checked, and the call-back to the elevator fight in CATWS--for my money, Marvel's greatest film--was terrific. Timeline tomfoolery often becomes muddled and, as mentioned, can result in a lack of investment in the proceedings (who cares what happens if they can just make it un-happen?), but I can't pretend I wasn't happy to see some familiar faces who have passed on or simply disappeared from the MCU. (Huzzah, Brock Rumlow!) Finally, though there are no mid- or post-credits scenes at the end of Endgame, the first credits sequence--which ends with a sort-of curtain call for Cap, Iron Man, Black Widow, Hulk, Thor, and Hawkeye--is quite epic in and of itself and entirely worth sticking around for. After that, it's okay to take off like a person who's consumed a bathtub-sized Diet Coke and has been waiting three and a half hours to pee. I see you. You're good.

Avengers: Endgame runs 182 minutes (yikes!) and is rated PG13 for "sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and some language."

Avengers: Endgame is one of Marvel's best offerings, and definitely finishes the Infinity Saga on an uptick. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Avengers: Endgame gets eight.

Fangirl points: I mean, you noticed I really, really like Sebastian Stan, right?

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE

The El Royale is run-down hotel that sits on the border between California and Nevada. It soon becomes a seedy battleground when seven strangers -- a cleric, a soul singer, a traveling salesman, two sisters, the manager and the mysterious Billy Lee -- converge on a fateful night for one last shot at redemption before everything goes wrong.

Director: Drew Goddard

Cast: Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, Dakota Johnson, Jon Hamm, Cailee Spaeny, Lewis Pullman, Nick Offerman, Chris Hemsworth

Release Date: October 12, 2018

Genres: Mystery , Thriller

Rated R for horror violence, and language including some sexual references

Runtime: 2h 21min

Review:

Bad Times at the El Royale is a solid twisty thriller from Drew Goddard.  You’d be remiss if you didn’t feel some very strong Tarantino vibes throughout mixed together with some Agatha Christie as each individual story plays out.  The film is stylish and engrossing even if the ultimate payoff is bit of a letdown.  Goddard cast is made up of strong performers and a bevy of recognizable faces but Broadway star Cynthia Erivo really leaves an impressive mark.  Jeff Bridges centers the whole thing with a tangible sense of heart with healthy shades of grey.  Jon Hamm does solid work in a limited role and the film is lesser for taking him off the board as early as it does.  A perpetually shirtless Chris Hemsworth is clearly having a blast hamming it up as the cult leader that brings all the plot threads together.  For all the strong performances and stories, you d start to get the sense that Drew Goddard fell in love with his own creation as the film starts to meander towards the end.  There’s really no reason for the film to be nearly 2 and half hours and the film suffers since this type of pulpy fare is best in short doses.  

B

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of First Man and Bad Times at the El Royale

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for First Man and Bad Times at the El Royale.

 

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

 

First on my agenda: First Man.

 

Some stuff you know and probably a lot you didn't know about Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon.

 

First Man is approximately 90% Things-I-Hate-About-Awards-Type-Movies, but I still enjoyed it more than I expected to. Ryan Gosling is terrific in the lead, and his supporting cast--led by the extraordinary Claire Foy--has no trouble keeping pace. The story of Armstrong's personal life is almost as fascinating as his road to the moon, and the film gives equal screen time to each. An over-abundance of extreme close-ups is effective in depicting claustrophobic cockpit conditions, but it gets awkward when it's just folks talking science or eating dinner. Likewise, jiggly camera work and very dark shots work well in putting the viewer inside the craft--often under terrifying circumstances--but otherwise are plain annoying. The movie could have used a bit of a trim, but it never really drags or feels bloated; ultimately the amazing story outweighs any flaws in the filmmaking. Closing with full disclosure: for the duration, all I could think of was Lincoln Osiris trying to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box, which is why they don't let me vote for the Oscars.

First Man clocks in at 141 minutes and is rated PG13 for "some thematic content involving peril, and brief strong language."

 

First Man is a flawed telling of a great story, well worth your movie dollar. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, First Man gets seven and a half.

 

Fangirl points: So many much-loved faces in this one! Shea Whigham! Corey Stoll! Ciaran Hinds! Pablo Schreiber! Brian d'Arcy James! Mister Cory Michael Smith!

 

Next on the docket, one of my most-anticipated titles of the year, Bad Times at the El Royale.

 

Mystery abounds at a past-its-prime hotel that straddles the state line between California and Nevada.

From the trailers, I expected Bad Times at the El Royale to be darkly funny, but instead it's mostly just dark. Smart, twisty storytelling and an exceptional cast should be the envy of Hollywood, with Chris Hemsworth, Cynthia Erivo, and Jeff Bridges turning in exceptionally strong performances. El Royale has layers to spare, and just when you think you've got it figured out, another one peels off to reveal something unexpected. The film boasts superb production design and a strong score by Michael Giacchino. I can't go into much detail without spoiling important plot points, but there are some disturbing and uncomfortable moments that lend a grim tone to the whole, ultimately making it less fun than it might have been, but no less brilliant.

 

Bad Times at the El Royale runs 141 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence, language, some drug content, and brief nudity."

 

Bad Times at the El Royale is one of the best movies I've seen this year...but I probably wouldn't watch it again. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Bad Times at the El Royale gets seven, which would have been eight but for a mean and unnecessary dig at my beautiful home state of West Virginia.

 

Fangirl points: You know it's officially awards season when Shea Whigham starts turning up in everything!

 

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: AVENGERS INFINITY WAR

Iron Man, Thor, the Hulk and the rest of the Avengers unite to battle their most powerful enemy yet -- the evil Thanos. On a mission to collect all six Infinity Stones, Thanos plans to use the artifacts to inflict his twisted will on reality. The fate of the planet and existence itself has never been more uncertain as everything the Avengers have fought for has led up to this moment.

Director: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Don Cheadle, Tom Holland, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan, Danai Gurira, Letitia Wright, Dave Bautista, Zoe Saldana, Josh Brolin, Chris Pratt

Release Date: April 27, 2018

Genres: Action, Adventure, Fantasy

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action throughout, language and some crude references.

Runtime: 2h 29min
 

Avengers Infinity War is the culmination of a massive and unprecedented shared universe.  The biggest question is does this huge ensemble of A list actors work, the answer is mostly.  Infinity War is an intensely busy film that carries multiple story lines throughout the film.  Most directors would easily get lost but Anthony and Joe Russo have steadily been prepping for this moment.  They expertly juggle everything while avoiding most of the pitfalls that could easily pop up and don’t make it a chore to watch.  The film has a strong verve to it mainly due to the collection of characters which have such wonderful charisma.  The interplay between all these characters makes the whole thing chug along.  Familiarity helps since we’ve been exposed to these characters in the past, so even if a particular role is small in this film, we’re invested.  The actors and actresses are all on their game, so it’s fun to watch all these top level talents appear onscreen like some sort of cinematic red carpet.  The biggest surprise though is Thanos, the CGI super villain voiced by Josh Brolin, who has far more depth than expected.  It’s a strong cog to the entire film which delivers epic action and iconic moments.  There is only a tad bit of fatigue that starts to set in before the final act starts.  It’s not surprising with so much happening and the finale is a somber closer but it’s hard not to see the set up for the next installment.  So while the film delivers real deaths, some of them do seem like they’ll be reversed as soon as the next film starts.  

B+

Cindy Prascik's Review of Avengers: Infinity War

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for Avengers: Infinity War.

 

Regarding spoilers: Because it's essential to my overall impression of the movie, I have to drop a pretty consequential "what" without giving away the "who," "how," "where," or "when." If you are overly concerned, by all means, put this aside until after you've seen the movie.

 

Onward to the review that's nearly as long as the film...........

 

The Avengers & Company face their (and the universe's) greatest threat yet in the mighty Thanos.

 

As regular reader(s) may remember, I'm often a little vexed by Marvel. On the one hand, there's Captain America: The Winter Soldier, second only to The Dark Knight as a benchmark of excellence for the superhero genre...or any genre, really. On the other hand, there's Age of Ultron and Civil War, a.k.a. "the eight-dollar naps." Spoiler junkie that I am, I knew a lot about Infinity War going in, and I was prepared to be both bored and annoyed by it. Thanks to a great cast and some spot-on humor, I was neither.

 

Infinity War is a jumble of plotlines that share a common endgame, but that never really feel like the same story. Marvel has thrown just about everyone in its existing cinematic universe at the screen for this one, the exclamation point at the end of the MCU's first decade. While it's iconic seeing them all (sort of) together, in many ways it makes a mess the film can't quite clean up, even with its ... erm ... "considerable" runtime. There are some eye-popping special effects, yet there's some wonky CGI as well, which I never understand in movies that cost this much to make. Alan Silvestri's score, much like the picture itself, reaches for epic without ever quite getting there. I think most everyone expected consequential deaths in Infinity War, but the movie goes for quantity rather than quality with the cull. So safe is it to assume most of what's done will be undone in part two that it's impossible to invest in any of it. It's easy to become frustrated with a film that's not much more than a setup for the next one and that doesn't achieve much of consequence (at least not much you can expect to stick) in its own right.

 

The good news is Infinity War is a supremely enjoyable two and a half hours. Credit first goes to its extraordinary cast, which is a delight almost to a person, both individually and in tandem. Whoever your favorites are, it's a fair bet they won't have enough screen time for your liking, but, really, everyone works together so well it's hard to complain. Being aware of real-world considerations like how many films certain actors have left in their Marvel contracts or the Marvel rollout schedule through 2022 may keep fans from taking the film's mammoth losses too seriously, but such complacency is entirely absent onscreen, and the cast proves itself more than capable of the emotional heavy lifting. Special shout-outs to Benedict Cumberbatch, a boundless genius; Tom Holland, the picture's heart and soul; Robert Downey, Jr., who is as good here as he's ever been; and Sebastian Stan, who expresses more with a single word or look than most actors do with a franchise. It's also worth saying again (and again and again) that Bradley Cooper doesn't get half enough credit for what he achieves with a CGI raccoon. It's easy to write off that character as comic relief, but Cooper's evocative work always gives Rocket real depth. Amidst the high stakes and great losses, Infinity War also has some legitimately funny stuff. The humor is organic and well placed, and not once did I feel my usual annoyance with Marvel shoe-horning in jokes and wisecracks that are ill-timed or ill-advised or sometimes both. As the end credits rolled, I was delighted and not just a little surprised to realize I'd hardly felt the passage of two and a half hours. The last time I could say that about a Marvel movie was never.

 

Avengers: Infinity War clocks in at two hours and twenty-nine minutes, and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action throughout, language, and some crude references."

 

Avengers: Infinity War is a big, fat mess and a tremendously good time, proof that a movie doesn't have to be technically great to be wholly worth seeing. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Avengers: Infinity War gets eight.

 

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: THOR: RAGNAROK

Imprisoned on the other side of the universe, the mighty Thor finds himself in a deadly gladiatorial contest that pits him against the Hulk, his former ally and fellow Avenger. Thor's quest for survival leads him in a race against time to prevent the all-powerful Hela from destroying his home world and the Asgardian civilization.

Director: Taika Waititi

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Mark Ruffalo, Cate Blanchett, Jeff Goldblum

Release Date: Nov 03, 2017

Genres: Action/Adventure, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Rated R for language throughout and some sexuality/nudity

Review:

Thor: Ragnarok is a much needed infusion of originality in the Marvel cinematic juggernaut.  Most the Marvel movies are enjoyable but tend to lean towards formulaic plots outside of some rare exceptions.  Thor: Ragnarock is a solid step outside of the tried and true Marvel formula delivering a huge dose of wacky fun.  Taika Waititi delivers a film brimming with fun from start to finish.  It’s a Technicolor fever dream that feels like a thoroughly enjoyable acid trip.  Stripping away the self serious tone of most comic book movies and going for a more comedic tone pay huge dividends.  Chris Hemsworth has always been a strong comedic actor and this slant plays well for him.  As a result, Hemsworth is free to deliver his best “Mimbo” interpretation of Thor.  The supporting cast embraces the lighter tone and everyone seems to be having a ball.  Tom Hiddleston keeps Loki interesting while lightening him up a bit.  Mark Ruffalo and Tessa Thompson are great counter balance to Hemsworth’s Thor with both doing strong work.  Cate Blanchett gleefully vamps it up as primary villain this go around.  If there’s a bit of a negative about Blanchett’s character it’s that she’s not given much to do except wait for Thor to come back to Asgard so they can get to the final battle.  It’s a real shame because she’s really impressive in her screentime, it would have really made the film even better had she’d been given something more substantial to do.  It’s a minor quibble for the film which really is one of most fun superhero films of the year.

A-

April Sokol's Reviews of Thor: Ragnarok & A Bad Moms Christmas

Hello readers!

This weekend was a big movie deal. Two big hit movies in the making both opened and so without further ado, to the theater I went.

First up was Thor: Ragnarok.

Thor: Ragnarok is the latest installment in the immensely popular Marvel Universe.

Directed by Taika Waititi

Run time is 2hr 10 min

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Mark Ruffalo, Cate Blanchett, Tessa Thompson. Karl Urban, Idris Elba and Anthony Hopkins

Thor Ragnarok is the seventeenth offering in the Marvel Universe. So the players are well known and broken in. While a lot of familiar faces abound (super quick fan girl shoutout to the adorable Matt Damon cameo) Thor Ragnarok introduces some new faces to the Marvel world. First and most impressive is the stunning Cate Blanchett. Cate chews her way through every second of screen time she's given. Gorgeous, powerful and absolutely deadly, Hela is just 100% joy to watch. I can feel all of next year's Hela Halloween costumes springing to life as I type this. We're also introduced to Valkyrie, a member of an all female warrior squad played to perfection by Tessa Thompson. I'm glad to see that someone seems to have gotten the memo that we are loving these strong woman characters. That high that so many women felt after Wonder Woman is going to be back after this.

Mark Ruffalo is back doing his thing as Bruce Banner/The Hulk. He's always so solid I hope people aren't taking him for granted. We finally get more of Idris Elba as Heimdall. Unfortunately he is STILL absolutely wasted in this role.  The PG 13 rating felt correct as there was comic book violence but certainly nothing to genuinely frighten the little members of the audience.

Thor Ragnarok feels quite a bit referential to Guardians of the Galaxy for me. Same level of laughter. Funny quirky characters portrayed on a stunning canvas. Queue the fight scene with iconic 70s rock song and it's almost too on the nose....but I found that I still enjoyed the ride. This isn't new ground for Mavel. This is what a fast ball right down the middle of their fanbase feels like.

My rating: 4 out of 5 stars.

And the answer to the question I always have at Marvel movies....2...there are 2 in credit scenes. You're welcome.


Next I moved down the hall to the highly anticipated (by me) A Bad Moms Christmas

Directed by: Jon Lucas and Scott Moore

Starring: Mila Kunis, Kristen Bell, Kathryn Hahn, Christine Baranski, Susan Sarandon, Cheryl Hines, Jay Hernandez and Peter Gallagher

Running time of 1hr 44 min. It is Rated R for crude sexual content and language throughout, and some drug use

My review:

Ok America. It's time. We can't seem to agree on much of anything as a country anymore. But I think we need to come together as 1 nation and appreciate the sheer brilliance that is Chrstine Baranski. Has she ever been anything less than flawless...ever? I think not. However much she is making, it's certainly not enough. Can we make this a thing?

We pick up shortly after our last adventure with the suburban Moms as Christmas is upon them. Of course they're all over worked, over stressed, under appreciated and exhausted....aren't we all? Every single Mom in America is going to find something familiar in these women. Lots of laughs and another chance for a really beautiful friend tribe to shine here. The biggest take away for me is how these women are so very true to life. These are my friends and family. This is actually how we talk when we get together. I do not know a single parent who actually deep down believes that they're not screwing it all up in some way. It's nice to be reminded of our shared humanity.

If you loved the first Bad Moms movie, you'll almost certainly enjoy this as well. This is a wonderful case of a bunch of actors really seeming to enjoy their work. You will smile. You will laugh. And you will want to have drinks with your best friends ASAP when the credits roll.

Bonus points to those who stay through the credits to realize that Peter Gallagher is actually the best dancer of the whole bunch. Who knew?! I give A Bad Moms Christmas a solid 4 out of 5 stars.

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Geostorm & Thor: Ragnarok

Dearest Blog: Yesterday I ended my week's vacation at Marquee Cinemas with a double-bill of Geostorm (finally) and Thor: Ragnarok. 

 

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers or a quick check of the IMDB cast listings.

 

First on the docket: a delayed screening of Geostorm.

 

When a satellite controlling extreme weather events is sabotaged, it's up to its prickly creator to make nice and go fix it.

 

Dear reader(s): Having missed two weekends at the cinema (!!!), I'm a little late to the Geostorm party, so I won't be the first to inform you the movie features a stupidly implausible plot, inane dialogue, and second-rate performances. What I may be the first to tell you is that I haven't had as much fun at the cinema in months. Indeed, Geostorm is the only picture in recent memory to render me totally oblivious to the outside world for a couple hours.

 

There's no denying Geostorm is a pretty bad movie by almost any quality barometer; it's Sharknado-level idiocy on a big-screen budget. Meathead extraordinaire Gerard Butler is the ideal hero for such a film, delivering a performance on par with "shepherd number two" in the third-grade Christmas pageant. Jim Sturgess and Abbie Cornish are even more laughable, and you really have to wonder how Ed Harris and Andy Garcia got talked into this. (My guess is blackmail. It's the only thing that makes sense.) The story plays out in predictably silly fashion, with painfully obvious "twists" and every cartoonish character behaving exactly as you'd expect. The good news is all that isn't really bad news because Geostorm knows exactly what it is, and thus couldn't be any more enjoyable. Throw in some solid disaster effects and a timely (if cheesy) message, and you've got a hilariously terrible outing that may well be the best time I've had at the movies in 2017.

 

Geostorm clocks in at 109 minutes and is rated PG13 for "destruction, action, and violence."

Geostorm is the best bad movie I've seen in a good long while. Of a possible nine Weasleys, I am exercising great restraint in awarding Geostorm only seven.

 

Fangirl points: Ohmygosh you guys, Robert Sheehan is in this movie!!

 

Next on my agenda: Thor: Ragnarok.

 

And you thought Loki was the bad sibling.

 

My usual Marvel disclaimer: For the most part I don't think Marvel movies are anything special; rather, they're enjoyed and quickly forgotten. The notable exception is Captain America: The Winter Soldier, which stands alone in its greatness, but, as series go, the Thor movies are always my Marvel faves. Ragnarok gives me no reason to change either of those opinions: Marvel movies are still nothing special, but the Thor series remains my favorite.

 

Getting the bad news out of the way first: Thor: Ragnarok feels about twelve hours long. I wouldn't say I was bored, but...well...for some of it I wouldn't exactly say I wasn't, either. The battle scenes didn't seem as repetitive or overlong as most Marvel movies (lookin' squarely at YOU, Avengers!), but, my god, it felt like I was sitting there forever. Luckily, that's about the only really bad thing I have to say about the film. Ragnarok isn't a funny superhero movie; it's a straight-up comedy about a superhero, fully self-aware. No shoe-horning in a Tony Stark wisecrack every 20 minutes, Ragnarok is organically hilarious. Trippy 70s effects, a bit reminiscent of Doctor Strange, are particularly well-suited to this outing, giving it the feel of an old-school arcade game. Chris Hemsworth (sadly shirtless only once) isn't just a perfectly-sculpted hero, he's legitimately funny, with great comic timing and terrific expressions. The supporting cast is filled with names that, on their own, are enough to draw me to any picture: Idris Elba, Tom Hiddleston, Benedict Cumberbatch, Karl Urban, Cate Blanchett...and--OH!--this is Cate as you haven't seen her before! Hiddleston's Loki remains the best thing about any Thor movie, but it's Cate's Hela who steals the show here, and whose pics you'll be Googling for your new phone wallpaper as soon as the credits roll (or was that just me?). Triple bonus points for carrying Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song from the trailer into the film itself--not just once, but twice!--a musical move so inspired as to be almost Edgar-Wrightish in its perfection.

Thor: Ragnarok runs 130 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action and brief suggestive material."

 

Thor: Ragnarok is another fun outing in Marvel's best series. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Thor: Ragnarok gets eight.

 

Fangirl points: Hey, Bruce Banner, you're lookin' mighty fine in that Duran Duran shirt!

 

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik' s Reviews of The Infiltrator & Ghostbusters

 

 

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for a pair of strange bedfellows: The Infiltrator and Ghostbusters. 

 

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers. First on the docket: The Infiltrator. 

 

A US Customs officer launches a dangerous undercover mission to catch one of the world's top drug kingpins. 

 

It is both a blessing and a curse that The Infiltrator is good, but not special. In an age where the Internet has no problem convincing people they hate films they haven't even seen yet, being neither great nor terrible enough to be buzzworthy isn't necessarily a bad thing. 

 

Still, structured as it is around a decorated actor (Bryan Cranston) in a role tailor-made to earn him more hardware, the tense tale ultimately can't help feeling a little disappointing. Cranston is solid in the lead, but it's John Leguizamo who steals the show as his loose-cannon partner. Diane Kruger, Benjamin Bratt, and Joseph Gilgun are also terrific in supporting roles. 

 

Characters are well fleshed out, so that even the worst earn a bit of sympathy. Focusing on the money side of the illegal narcotics trade, The Infiltrator is less sensational than movies that detail the gorier realities of drug running, but the intense plot has no trouble holding your attention. Sadly, if it's details that elevate a good movie to great, that's where The Infiltrator fails. 

 

Some of the direction is decidedly amateurish, with too-obvious foreshadowing and lingering frames that almost stray into comic territory. Hairstyles, fashions, and music are sometimes not correct for the picture's 1985 setting. There's no obvious filler, but the movie runs a hair too long and drags noticeably in the second act. 

 

The Infiltrator clocks in at 127 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence, language throughout, some sexual content, and drug material." The Infiltrator boasts strong performances and well-definted characters, offering solid "grown-up" counterprogramming on a blockbuster family-release weekend. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Infiltrator gets six and a half. Fangirl points: Jason Isaacs! 

 

Next up: the poliarizing reboot of Ghostbusters, a.k.a. why it's best to ignore Internet trolls. Three scientists, an MTA employee, and the world's best-looking receptionist team up to quash a ghost infestation in New York. 

 

Dear Reader(s): We all have things we love enough to drive us past the point of reason. I am no stranger to this phenomenon, and, thus, in my presence it is best not to speak of that unfunny, unholy, disrespectful dumpster fire that is 2004's Starsky & Hutch. Herein I shall attempt to give even the staunchest fan of the original Ghostbusters a few reasons why 2016's Ghostbusters is NOT 2004's Starsky & Hutch. 

Ghostbusters is a well-and-truly funny comedy, with laugh-out-loud moments throughout. Rather than bastardizing beloved characters, it reboots with new ones. Kristin Wiig and Melissa McCarthy are delightful as estranged friends reunited by the spirit crisis; their chemistry is fantastic. Leslie Jones' wisecracks and physical comedy provide the movie's funniest moments, and Chris Hemsworth is perfect as the dopey but ridiculously-hot office assistant. 

 

There's nostalgia aplenty for those who want it, in faces both living and undead, the recurring Ghostbusters theme, and that very familiar logo. 

 

Though rarer than laughs, there are a fair few proper scares to be had as well. The movie boasts super effects and 3D that is not just worthwhile, but great! Ghosts run the gamut from pretty terrifying to pretty hilarious. The comedy slows up a bit in the movie's second act, displaced by some fun, well-executed action sequences. 

 

Only Kate McKinnon's character, Jillian Holtzman, is a weak link, so jarringly off that every appearance becomes an unfortunate distraction. Writers and actress must share blame for bringing to life possibly the most irritating character I've ever seen on the silver screen (and, yes, I'm including Jar-Jar Binks in that equation). 

 

Ghostbusters runs 116 minutes and is rated PG13 for "supernatural action and some crude humor." Ghostbusters is a uniformly funny movie with a great cast and terrific effects. Only that rare individual who strongly feels Chris Hemsworth is better used in something like Black Hat wouldn't find something to enjoy here. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Ghostbusters gets seven and a half. 

 

Fangirl points: Michael Kenneth Williams and one teeny glimpse of my beloved Shubert Theatre! 

 

Until next time...

 

MOVIE REVIEW: GHOSTBUSTERS

Director: Paul Feig 

Cast: Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones, Chris Hemsworth

Release Date: Jul 15, 2016

Rated PG-13 for supernatural action and some crude humor.

Runtime: 1 hr. 47 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Comedy, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Review:

Paul Feig’s Ghostbusters isn’t the disaster many predicted but it’s not good enough on it’s own to prove it was necessary either.  I’m one of the few people who always liked Ghostbusters but was never in love with it even though I grew up with it.  There’s a definite fondness for the original film but I never really thought it was sacrilegious to remake it with women.  The director and cast do the best with what they have but it’s clear that there’s an issue with the story.  The overall plot hits a lot of the same notes that the original did but with a more generic punch.  As the film goes on, it does feel like everybody is reigning it in a bit, making me wish they’d decided to go for a full on R rated comedy.  I think that would have been a better choice for this director and cast.  As is, the cast is solid throughout with Chris Hemsworth leaving the biggest impression by displaying some strong comedic chops.  The film is a tad overlong by about 20 minutes or with some noticeable dead spots that could have been easily excised.  The Ghostbusters’ remake isn’t a train wreck but it’s not as good as it should have been to justify its existence. 

C+